ghrifter
... what?
Tipping was something that the patricians/bourgie upper class did to help uplift the waiters/service staff in Europe. It caught on in the USA in the late 1800s and fell out of favor from that upper class in Europe by then.
Largely, USA coopted a "noble gesture" from wealthy Europeans and it has persisted ever since for like a century.
Anyways, I hate tipping as well.
Also, I dont like GitHub's political posturing nonsense, so thats a major reason too.
I always thought it was account based! At least thats what my coworker and IT guy explained it to me as.
Thanks for your benevolence.
There are two types of hair dressers: ones that open their own shop (startup), and others that join existing shops (corporate)
Its just a self deterrent.
Also, USA is the world empire AKA superpower.
Theres a lot of reports and other tasks that the ISP would have to do, but was put of 2 to 3 years since 2015.
I still can't really fathom starting a car if I dont turn the key manually... I guess its like you say, silly until you use it
wew. yes our precious "hacking" time for making web apps
Nawh, they are following the power delegation given to them by congress. They dont have to do fuck all for public comments, other then recieve them, document them, and say "we got feedback but fuck yall we going forward"
but you cant be a lobbyist
so what do you work for? other goverment jobs, or back to the private sector.
what if we had a google exec become some internet government position, then went back to google? would there be this public outcry?
ugh. No one ever bothers to bring up this document either, which isnt going away... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_Open_Internet_Order_2010
However, being from Verizon is noticeable.
85. Need for the No Paid Prioritization Rule. The Commission concluded in the Title II Order that “fast lanes” or “paid prioritization” practices “harm consumers, competition, and innovation, as well as create disincentives to promote broadband deployment.”189 The Commission adopted this ex ante flat ban on individual negotiations to address an apparently nonexistent problem. The ban on paid prioritization did not exist prior to the Title II Order and even then the record evidence confirmed that no such rule was needed since several large Internet service providers made it clear that that they did not engage in paid prioritization190 and had no plans to do so.191 We seek comment on the continued need for such a rule and our authority to retain it.
ex ante: based on forecasts rather than actual results.